Browsed by
Tag: christianity

Intelligent Design a Boondoggle

Intelligent Design a Boondoggle

Comments 0 Comment

In a roundtable interview with reporters from five Texas newspapers President Bush said yesterday that he believes schools should discuss “intelligent design” alongside evolution when teaching students about the creation of life.

No problem. Just don’t ask science teachers to teach it. Teach it in religion classes, not alongside evolutionary theories in biology class. The principle of selection: what lives to reproduce passes on its genes. There are discussions about different theories within the science of evolution – debate about catastrophic events, punctuated and gradual evolution, the big bang. Much of science has latent mysterious content – read up on string theory or strange attractors, for example. However, renaming “creationism” as “intelligent design” doesn’t make it science. What are you going to teach? Bible verses? In any case, there are lots of creation stories – you’d then have to teach them all, not just the Genesis account. Wouldn’t it be better to leave that to families and the worship centers of the different religions? Why would the public school system be teaching Judeo-Christianity?

Intelligent design refers to the theory that “unspecified intelligent causes” (i.e. God the Father) are responsible for the origin of the universe and of life in all its diversity – well anyway, the life we know, which is based on carbon.

Don’t laugh – these pseudochristics are serious! They are already anti-intellectual, anti-science. They want followers, not thinkers.

The House Subcommittee on Basic Education in Pennsylvania heard testimony Monday on a bill that would allow local school boards to mandate that science lessons include intelligent design. The legislation is sponsored by only a dozen lawmakers. A federal judge will consider the issue this fall, when a lawsuit against the Dover Area School District is scheduled to go to trial. The suit alleges that the school board violated the constitutional separation of church and state when it voted in October to require ninth-grade students to hear about intelligent design during biology class.

Of course, here in Georgia, the infamous Cobb Country had big stickers in all the science textbooks proclaiming that evolution is just a theory until a federal judge in Atlanta finally put the nix on it in January saying the disclaimers are an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The stickers were added after more than 2,000 parents complained that the textbooks presented evolution as fact, without mentioning rival ideas about the beginnings of life, such as the biblical story of creation. Six parents and the American Civil Liberties Union then sued, contending the disclaimers violated the separation of church and state and unfairly singled out evolution from thousands of other scientific theories as suspect. The judge ruled that “While evolution is subject to criticism, particularly with respect to the mechanism by which it occurred, the sticker misleads students regarding the significance and value of evolution in the scientific community.” “By denigrating evolution, the school board appears to be endorsing the well-known prevailing alternative theory, creationism or variations thereof.” Last year, Georgia’s education chief proposed a science curriculum that dropped the word “evolution” in favor of “changes over time.” The idea was dropped amid protests from teachers.

This focus on the new creationism is very clever. If they get religion taught as science they gain more control over the children (get ’em while they’re young). Such children will be unable to distinguish between science and religion, but as Bush himself shows, many of our kids are impervious to the very best education. We may lose out in the science and technology wars of the future, but hey, we’re going down anyway with the gradual destruction of the public school system that helped us rise. If the fight fails, they still motivate their fearful, hateful base -energizing them with that ole God is on our side bull at a time when people are getting less enthused about Iraq, oil/gas prices, and so on. Now that’s strategic politics.

One question, though – if you believe in creationism (and that’s what this is), then you probably also believe that God placed humans in the position of the stewards of the earth. How is it that the same group of people who advocate for creationism are first in line to let corporations pollute? Where are their environmental concerns? Some stewards.

What possible joint interest could a real Christian have with the death and power policies of this administration? Believers are so easily manipulated – don’t you remember that warning about false prophets?

Which theologian are you?

Which theologian are you?

Comments 0 Comment

Kind of outdated and the questions aren’t that great, but anyway…

You scored as Paul Tillich. Paul Tillich sought to express Christian truth in an existentialist way. Our primary problem is alienation from the ground of our being, so that our life is meaningless.

Paul Tillich
87%

Jurgen Moltmann
73%

Martin Luther
67%

Charles Finney
60%

Friedrich Schleiermacher
53%

John Calvin
53%

Augustine
47%

Karl Barth
20%

Jonathan Edwards
13%

Anselm
0%

Which theologian are you?
created with QuizFarm.com

Emergent/ Postmodern? The assumptions are a bit 19th century or earlier… but still an interesting quiz. Many of the questions are the same or similar to the previous quiz.

You scored as Emergent/Postmodern. You are Emergent/Postmodern in your theology. You feel alienated from older forms of church, you don’t think they connect to modern culture very well. No one knows the whole truth about God, and we have much to learn from each other, and so learning takes place in dialogue. Evangelism should take place in relationships rather than through crusades and altar-calls. People are interested in spirituality and want to ask questions, so the church should help them to do this.

Emergent/Postmodern
75%

Classical Liberal
71%

Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan
71%

Modern Liberal
57%

Neo orthodox
50%

Roman Catholic
46%

Charismatic/Pentecostal
46%

Reformed Evangelical
32%

Fundamentalist
0%

What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com

A Former Witness Writes

A Former Witness Writes

Comments 0 Comment

I don’t know if you remember me but I had wrote you an email about how much I enjoyed your web site. Have you ever seen that video Witnesses of Jehovah? I ordered it. It had a lot of good information but I didn’t like the propaganda style making of the video. The music, the horror stories and them dramatizing the the little girl crying and sitting while saluting the flag (sitting during a flag salute is against Witness doctrine anyways). I grew up a Witness kid and it wasn’t that bad. I did love that animation Jesus story! Watch out Disney!!!! lol All they really had to do is present the facts in a fair balanced way, which they did with exception of those few things I mentioned. Keep in touch and keep up the fair and balanced work you are doing. The truth is there it’s just so hard to get through to them, it is a tremendous amount of mind control they are under. I feel for them because I was there once. Please continue on your crusade and if there is anything I can do to help please let me know.
Respectfully,
Ruben

Hi Ruben! Yeah, there were a lot of things that didn’t ring true in the video for me, but at least it’s a start. I actually enjoyed explaining why I didn’t salute the flag when I was a kid – actually, I still don’t salute the flag. There is something so creepy and nationalistic to me about it.

I feel for most of the people who write to me, but I’ve gotten some serious hate mail too. I seem to really hit a chord with some of them that makes them explode with anger. My idea is simply to try to model simple acceptance and compassion – which I do sometimes better than others – but just to show that there might be other options for their lives than to be the “evil exJW” or to become a fanatic of some other religious outlook. By the way, there are some excellent resources out there now. There is an “Out of the Cocoon” newsletter on my links page put together by a terrific woman named Brenda Lee (she gets little anecdotes and stories from other exJWs that are interesting), and there is a wonderful guy named Richard Francis who runs the Love Ministries (He has some thought-provoking books for download – “Jehovah lives in Brooklyn” was the book that first impressed me) and a blog at http://www.loveministries.blogspot.com/.
I’ve been keeping up on JWs in the news through Silent Lambs (what IS it with religion and pedophilia?) and the Watchtower Information service. I’ve put together everything I can find on my links page. Some of the links have things I don’t particularly agree with, but I figure that each person has to sift through things themselves to the extent that they feel called to do so.

I pretty much steer clear of the biblical interpretation and doctrinal argument sites. Having studied religion academically for many years, I have only become convinced that it’s pretty useless to make arguments without an understanding of the culture of the time and an even deeper understanding of Hebrew and Greek. I have my own ideas, of course, but this is the area where people get really irrational and bizarre. And since we’ve pretty much lost the gift of dialogue and debate and communication in a spirit of caring, it doesn’t seem worth it to me to get much involved with that. This is all the more the case when I consider how late in the game came the idea of “inspiration from God,” especially with regard to the text, which was taken through a selection process responsible for things like the burning of libraries. Once you had to basically agree to a loyalty oath to get a government job, once there were defined contours of acceptable christianity that were inline with power and circumscribed by “heresies”, then all the joy and variety of the early christians was pretty much lost. And in the US, it’s obvious more than ever that JWs aren’t the only ones who have completely gotten off track with regard to the central messages. It seems to me that all gifts are necessary when they show the “gifts of the spirit” – and the flip side of that of course is that when they bear “fruit” that it destructive and anti-love, it’s time to reassess.

My feeling is that one first has to absorb the milk of loving kindness, forgiveness, compassion, love, empathy – and it is more the practice of these that leads to deeper wisdom than anything else. When you then return to the text, it just reads differently from an entirely new perspective. Or as the JWs say – you are ready for more substantial “food” and see through the glass less darkly. To me, this is a lifetime journey required of all of us, not the responsibility of a handful of men in Brooklyn (or Washington…or).

So I guess what I’m trying to say in this roundabout fashion is that I’m not at all on a crusade. Some people can find a right path for them in the center of the JWs – there are those with the “spirit” who are JWs, as there are in any religion, all religions. But I think JWS are left stranded in ways that those in other religions may not be – and at least I can offer some alternate ways to think about themselves, some practical nuggets to survive and thrive, point to some other resources, and reframe things enough that perhaps it is a little bridge to the next stage. That’s all I can really hope for – it’s little enough in the scheme of things. I had some wonderful teachers that collectively helped me just to take that couple of steps, to give myself permission to find a more authentic way of being that was actually truer to what I felt to be a calling, a reorientation (an attunement that is at the same time an atonement). If I can show someone that there is a bridge, that they are not alone in placing the next stepping stone in front of their feet, then I feel that I have done as I could do, with honor and ethics and care. We all need a reminder that our choice is less between God and the World (or Evil) than between love and nothing. I need that reminder too, and this also helps me to remember – to repent in the old sense of “turn again” – turning again to that principle, reorienting again to the direction of love.

What can you do to help – nothing that I can think of for me, but probably lots and lots and lots for yourself and others. Caring and kindness sure go an awfully long way!

R: I believe you misunderstood me when I said you were on a “crusade”. With what I’ve read on your website I know you are not out there to bash on Witnesses but to help those who need it, like you mentioned in your response. I do feel that your intentions are good and you are trying to help others. Keep up the good work.

“Good Steward”????

“Good Steward”????

Comments 2 comments

Well, all in all, both men did very well. These presidential debates are the most serious, the most exciting, the most historically resonant of any in my living memory. Anyone who wants to now has plenty of information to do their own research, and make an informed voting decision. Voter registration is up.

I’m really beat and I’ve had an extraordinarily…um..unusual week. But I can’t go to bed after the second presidential debate without at least screaming out to cyberspace:

Bush claimed to be "a good steward"????????

A GOOD STEWARD??????????

I hope that the religious communities do a little comparision in their own theologies, and consult one another about what the biblical definition of "steward" is. For one, it is a highly charged phrase. It distinguishes between two kinds of biblical interpretation regarding Genesis. Some believe that God granted man dominion over the world, to rule over it – and others believe that God appointed man as steward, a manager over the animals and fish and the entire world until such time as he would be held accountable (Gen. 1:26-28).

A good steward is an administrator of another’s property or estate and so, in the same way, humans (or even just men and not women) are entrusted with God’s property, to manage and care for God’s creation.

Kerry missed a big big big chance there. A quick listing of the top ten anti-environmental actions of Bush might have gone a little distance here. Yes, yes, we all understand that Kerry will respect science as Bush does not. But he could’ve really really zinged him on that!

Here are just a few little thoughts on stewardship that one can find with minimal digging before falling asleep.

In the OT [OT Old Testament] a steward is a man who is ‘over a house’ (Gn. 43:19; 44:4; Isa. 22:15). In the NT [NT New Testament] there are two words translated steward: epitropos (Mt. 20:8; Gal. 4:2), i.e. one to whose care or honour one has been entrusted, a curator, a guardian; and oikonomos (Lk. 16:2-3; 1 Cor. 4:1-2; Tit. 1:7; 1 Pet. 4:10), i.e. a manager, a superintendent-from oikos(‘house’) and nemoµ(‘to dispense’ or ‘to manage’). The word is used to describe the function of delegated responsibility. Christians are the stewards for the Christ, admitted to the responsibilities of Christ’s overruling of his world; so that stewardship (oikonomia) can be referred to similarly as a dispensation (1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 3:2; Col. 1:25).

Worthy to be stewards of rent and land. –Chaucer.

As good stewards of the manifold grace of God. –1 Peter 4:10

For Tolkein fans, the steward of Gondor. The Stewards watched over the throne until it could be reclaimed by a true King of Gondor, an heir of Elendil.

To spiritual people negotiating the priorities between Mammon (wealth, a false god) and the health of the earth itself, a good steward has the connotation of an attitude toward the environment, a sense of connectedness and belonging, an understanding of the interconnectedness of everything in the universe – a sense of being at home. When the earth has serious disruptions in its cycles, its energy systems, and its living systems, it can heal by regaining its balance; pollutants are transformed, physical damage is corrected, animal and plant populations adjust. But when the earth’s systems are extremely disrupted then homeostasis, balance, and self-regulatory processes cannot be re-established in the same way – and major changes can occur detrimental to human life.

Examine your consciences – can anyone really say that Bush is a good steward, in any sense?

Some people think that stewardship is all about tithing or donating money or time to a church, but numerous sites- I found one just off the bat – also talk about the different spiritual responsibilities of stewardship in the religious sense. It "demands a way of life that encourages virtue and bears the fruit of solidarity among peoples."

A steward does not own the kingdom. The king determines when and how long a steward serves him. A steward handles affairs for someone else. If Bush is a "steward" is it for the American people? For the world? For God? Do you really believe that it could be any of these? Really?

Each person contributes or should be able to contribute to the well-being of society, and each person has the opportunity to care for others and to help them thrive. Stewardship is collective.

I believe that, collectively, we are stewards. We all have to answer to ourselves and to our children and all our seventh cousins of the world, in repercussions and disrupted systems, and the widening gyres of destruction. We have to take responsibility for what we have allowed to happen, from the dumbing down of the population, to allowing certain power interests to take over our country.

Is Bush a good steward? Christians, you know what a good steward is. Is it the mark of a good steward to smirk and brag that he is a good steward? Has he enabled us and all the world to breathe easier, to thrive, to find healthier interchanges between humanity and the planet, between our nation and the rest of the world, between ourselves and our neighbors?

There are lots of things to say about this excellent debate, but I thought that if this phrase of the "good steward" stuck out to me as code for "I’m a christian" it might for others as well. My question is, what exactly is the nature of this christianity? It doesn’t seem very christian to me. As the highest executive of the US (of course, that is a matter of some debate), Bush is meant to be a steward of the American people. Is that really what you see?

Look around you. Open your eyes.